Glover v. Glover
231 Ariz. 1
| Ariz. Ct. App. | 2012Background
- Mother and Father divorced in Massachusetts; Massachusetts judgment incorporated and merged a separation agreement with child‑support terms.
- Parties moved to Arizona; Father sought modification of Massachusetts judgment in Arizona court, including increasing parenting time and adjusting support.
- Arizona court proceedings included Rule 69 agreement efforts and an implied modification order, though a separate order reportedly reducing support did not exist.
- State of Arizona intervened in 2010 to address past-due child support and arrearages using the Massachusetts judgment.
- Massachusetts judgment was never registered in Arizona under UIFSA; this triggered the central jurisdiction issue addressed on appeal.
- Court ultimately held that failure to register the foreign order deprived Arizona court of subject matter jurisdiction to modify it, rendering the modification order void and the appeal subject to dismissal.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether failure to register the foreign order confers jurisdiction to modify. | Mother argues lack of registration deprives jurisdiction. | Father contends registration is not jurisdictional or can be bypassed via alternate enforcement. | Registration is jurisdictional; lack of registration voids modification. |
Key Cases Cited
- Cockerham v. Zikratch, 127 Ariz. 230 (Arizona 1980) (void judgments when issued without jurisdiction)
- McHazlett v. Otis Eng’g Carp., 133 Ariz. 530 (Arizona 1982) (jurisdictional defects render judgments void)
- Health for Life Brands, Inc. v. Powley, 203 Ariz. 536 (Arizona 2002) (waiver of procedural defects cannot waive lack of subject matter jurisdiction)